• Sections
Noah's flood real

# Noah's flood real

Posted in the Atheism Forum

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#2468 Feb 10, 2013
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>No, the Bible says nothing about whole numbers in particular or math problems in general--that is your assumption. The Bible simply gives the dimensions of a circular pool. We don't know whether the Hebrews of the time used fractions or not--or at least I don't. Nor do we know whether the pool in question was a true circle.

But from the descriptions and dimensions, we can infer that the writer knew very little about mathematics and was more than a little imprecise about measurement--the equivalent of a modern "good enough for government work" attitude, perhaps.

Whatever the reason, the passage is flawed.
Any study of the time period will show you that decimal point were not used.

The passage is correct 3 is Pi using whole numbers. Where is it written that decimal points must be used?

It not! 3 is Pi you all sure need to try harder to disprove the bible.
A cubit is a very crude measurement and you're worried about a point one.

What ever.

Richardfs

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#2469 Feb 11, 2013
Yellowknightmare wrote:
<quoted text>
you still participate in the worship when you do the celebrations..
so unless you do not participate in halloween christmas valentines day etc...
cult definition
1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
so if you participate in any holidays, you are worshipping the gods that they orginate from.
the ceremonies and practices remain the same.
As christmas is a celebration of the winter solstice you must be a pagan.

Richardfs

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#2470 Feb 11, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice to get back to the point of the thread.
The Bible does claim a quick raising up of the land and dropping or lowering of the ocean floors. This would explain how the flood was able to cover the highest mountains, they were much smaller before God raised them up after the flood. Note: the claims found on top of Everest proof that it was under water.
Now the plant life.
Before the flood there might have been a type of ice canopy surrounding the earth creating a green house effect making all of earth flush with huge plant life. The flood would have killed these off and covered them in mud creating lots of coal and oil.
Now how could 500 million year old coal have man mad items inside of it?
"A fossilized human skull was found in coal that was sold in Germany (mid-1800s). A jawbone of a child was found in coal in Tuscany (1958). Two giant human molars were found in Montana (1926). A human leg was found by a West Virginia coal miner. It had changed into coal.Ã¯Â¿Â½pp. 34-35.
A woman, in Illinois, reportedly found a gold chain in a chunk of coal which broke open (1891). A small steel cube was found in a block of coal in Austria (1885). An iron pot was found in coal in Oklahoma (1912). A woman found a child's spoon in coal (1937).Ã¯Â¿Â½p. 35.
In 1944 Newton Anderson claimed to have found this bell inside a lump of coal that was mined near his house in West Virginia. When Newton dropped the lump it broke, revealing a bell encased inside.
What is a brass bell with an iron clapper doing in coal that is supposed to be hundreds of
millions of years old? According to Norm Scharbough's book Ammunition (which includes a compilation of many such "coal anecdotes") the bell was extensively analyzed at the University of Oklahoma and it was found to contain an unusual mixture of metals, different from any modern usage. Photo and text from Genesis Park.
An iron nail was found in a Cretaceous block from the Mesozoic era (mid-1800s). A gold thread was found in stone in England (1844). An iron nail was found in quartz in California (1851). A silver vessel was found in solid rock in Massachusetts (1851).
The mold of a metal screw was found in a chunk of feldspar (1851). An intricately carved and inlaid metal bowl was found in solid rock (1852). An iron nail was found in rock in a Peruvian mine by Spanish conquistadores (1572).Ã¯Â¿Â½pp. 35-36."
http://s8int.com/page8.html
And I have LGMs at the bottom of my garden.
Thinking

Cullompton, UK

#2471 Feb 11, 2013
Civilisations were using fractional approximations to pi long before your POS bible was invented.

Your bible was already out of date when the goatfuckers wrote it.
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Any study of the time period will show you that decimal point were not used.
The passage is correct 3 is Pi using whole numbers. Where is it written that decimal points must be used?
It not! 3 is Pi you all sure need to try harder to disprove the bible.
A cubit is a very crude measurement and you're worried about a point one.
What ever.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#2472 Feb 11, 2013
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_fract...

Indeed you are correct! No need for people of that time to round up or down or only use while numbers. The ancient Egyptians amongst other cultures were using fractions long before the genesis myth was written.
Thinking wrote:
Civilisations were using fractional approximations to pi long before your POS bible was invented.
Your bible was already out of date when the goatfuckers wrote it.
<quoted text>

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2473 Feb 11, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
I am simply stating the bible problem is this: 10*(Pi rounded to a whole number)=30.
Not: 10*Pi=(31.4 rounded to whole number)
Why would you think that is the problem in the Bible? The number pi was not singled out as a number of independent interest for a few hundred years; the goal was to find the circumference given the diameter. Given that as the problem, if the 10 is a rounded value, then the rounded value of the circumference could be anywhere from 30 to 33.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2474 Feb 11, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Civilisations were using fractional approximations to pi long before your POS bible was invented.
Your bible was already out of date when the goatfuckers wrote it.
<quoted text>
The Babylonians mainly used the equivalent pi=3, which is where the Biblical sources probably got their approximation from. The Egyptians had one value for the circumference and another for the area of a circle. They didn't realize (as the Babylonians did) the connection between the two.

Even fractions were problematic at that stage. The Egyptians had the most developed version of fractions, but even theirs was hard to use. The Babylonians had a base 60 system that didn't actually tell the positional value. An analogy would be writing the same thing for 1.2, 12, 120, and 1200. You see, they didn't have a zero.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2475 Feb 11, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_fract...
Indeed you are correct! No need for people of that time to round up or down or only use while numbers. The ancient Egyptians amongst other cultures were using fractions long before the genesis myth was written.
<quoted text>
Egyptian fractions were unwieldy and were not used in other places. The Biblical results were probably obtained from the Babylonians.
Thinking

Cullompton, UK

#2476 Feb 11, 2013
Ancient Egyptians used 256/81 as an approximation for pi,~3.16.

Their fraction notation is explained here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_fraction
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
The Babylonians mainly used the equivalent pi=3, which is where the Biblical sources probably got their approximation from. The Egyptians had one value for the circumference and another for the area of a circle. They didn't realize (as the Babylonians did) the connection between the two.
Even fractions were problematic at that stage. The Egyptians had the most developed version of fractions, but even theirs was hard to use. The Babylonians had a base 60 system that didn't actually tell the positional value. An analogy would be writing the same thing for 1.2, 12, 120, and 1200. You see, they didn't have a zero.

Since: Mar 11

#2477 Feb 11, 2013
Indeed that wouldn't be the only thing they stole from the Babylonians.
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Egyptian fractions were unwieldy and were not used in other places. The Biblical results were probably obtained from the Babylonians.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2478 Feb 11, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Ancient Egyptians used 256/81 as an approximation for pi,~3.16.
Their fraction notation is explained here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_fraction
<quoted text>
That was their version for area calculations, not for circumference calculations, for which they used a different method. Also, 256/81 is not in the form an Egyptian would have used. Except for 2/3, all of their fractions had a numerator of 1.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2479 Feb 11, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Ancient Egyptians used 256/81 as an approximation for pi,~3.16.
Their fraction notation is explained here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_fraction
<quoted text>
I'd also add that they did NOT use an actual number for their calculations. Instead, they had a procedure that we *today* interpret as saying that pi=256/81.

What the ancient Egyptians did, at least according to the Rhind papyrus (a collection of mathematical exercises from about the second intermediate period), was take the diameter, subtract 1/9 of that diameter, then square the result. That gave them their approximation for the area of a circle. If you compare that to the *actual* formula of A=pi*r^2, then you get the pi=256/81 approximation.
Thinking

Cullompton, UK

#2480 Feb 11, 2013
L'esprit de l'escalier... did they do better than just using 3? Yes they did.
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd also add that they did NOT use an actual number for their calculations. Instead, they had a procedure that we *today* interpret as saying that pi=256/81.
What the ancient Egyptians did, at least according to the Rhind papyrus (a collection of mathematical exercises from about the second intermediate period), was take the diameter, subtract 1/9 of that diameter, then square the result. That gave them their approximation for the area of a circle. If you compare that to the *actual* formula of A=pi*r^2, then you get the pi=256/81 approximation.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2481 Feb 11, 2013
Thinking wrote:
L'esprit de l'escalier... did they do better than just using 3? Yes they did.
<quoted text>
Granted. The first *theoretical* calculation of pi was by Archimedes around 200BC. He obtained 3+10/71 <pi<3+1/7. The latter is the oft-used 22/7 for the approximation.
Thinking

Cullompton, UK

#2482 Feb 11, 2013
Having forgotten the 96 sided polygon method myself, I found this:

www.delphiforfun.org/programs/Math_Topics/Arc...

Which led me to wonder whether Archimedes would glory in our having generated pi to 10 trillion figures or whether he'd have hoped for a more definite method other than iteration after 2200 years.
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Granted. The first *theoretical* calculation of pi was by Archimedes around 200BC. He obtained 3+10/71 <pi<3+1/7. The latter is the oft-used 22/7 for the approximation.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2483 Feb 11, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Having forgotten the 96 sided polygon method myself, I found this:
www.delphiforfun.org/programs/Math_Topics/Arc...
Which led me to wonder whether Archimedes would glory in our having generated pi to 10 trillion figures or whether he'd have hoped for a more definite method other than iteration after 2200 years.
<quoted text>
Given the pi is transcendental, and probably a normal number (digits essentially random), I'm not convinced a more definite method is possible. I also doubt the continued fraction expansion is 'regular' in any reasonable way.
Thinking

Cullompton, UK

#2484 Feb 11, 2013
Me neither. I just wonder if Archimedes accepted that.
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Given the pi is transcendental, and probably a normal number (digits essentially random), I'm not convinced a more definite method is possible. I also doubt the continued fraction expansion is 'regular' in any reasonable way.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2485 Feb 11, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Me neither. I just wonder if Archimedes accepted that.
<quoted text>
Well, Archimedes would not have known about the irrationality of pi, let alone the fact that it is transcendental (or have even understood what it means to be transcendental). The irrationality of pi wasn't known until the middle of the 18th century AD and the transcendence of pi not until 1882.
Thinking

Cullompton, UK

#2486 Feb 11, 2013
Agree with the points about 1761 and 1882. He may have suspected something was up though, whatever the reason. Archimedes knew for example that root 3 was proving to be a problem to represent as a fraction.
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, Archimedes would not have known about the irrationality of pi, let alone the fact that it is transcendental (or have even understood what it means to be transcendental). The irrationality of pi wasn't known until the middle of the 18th century AD and the transcendence of pi not until 1882.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

#2487 Feb 11, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Egyptian fractions were unwieldy and were not used in other places. The Biblical results were probably obtained from the Babylonians.
I don't think there was any calculation involved. They were describing the pool, not analyzing it. As such, they wouldn't have taken one measurement and then calculated the other, but would have measured them both. The inaccuracy simply shows how crude those measurements were.

I've never taken a very close look at the history of math--maybe it's time to do that. Somehow, I doubt that the early Hebrews will play much of a role in it, though.

#### Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

### Atheism Discussions

"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 13 min Regolith Based Li... 75,476
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 1 hr John 6,109
Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... 1 hr John 209
Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 10 hr Nemesis 4,070
Majority of Scots now have no religion (May '16) 11 hr John 164
Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 13 hr Eagle 12 - 32,055
Evidence for God! (Oct '14) 16 hr Eagle 12 - 581

#### Atheism News

More Atheism News from Topix »

More from around the web